>> yes, i will get paid just as much if i retire. when i was 65, i could have retired. i'm probably too stupid to have this job at this point. i don't know what else i will do. i will certainly retire absolutely retire at the time where i perceive that i am not as good as i used to be. i lost a step. i don't want the product of my judicial career to be demeaned by inadequate performance later on >> have you ever asked anybody to tell you when they think you lost a step? >> i have many friends and enemies who will certainly tell me. >> the name of the book is

"reading law: the interpretation of legal texts" by antonin scalia and bryan a. garner. thank you very much sir. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

and richard williams from the center of from 60 discusses the role of the administration in assuring the safety of domestic and foreign foods. washington journal, live it 7:00 a.m. eastern, on c-span. >> the internet brings transparency to almost everything it touches. privacy becomes a construct. it is an artificial construct, a

very important one, created by laws and enforcement. >> beckstrom look at a signing a website addresses. a looked at cybersecurity on "the communicators" on c-span2. >> the house of commons is in recess. they will return september 3. we will take a look at the arguments in british parliament over the past few months. the company that runs it takes us through the events surrounding the tourism debt crisis, the queen's diamond jubilee ceremony, the barclays financial investigation, and the levenson enquiry. between politicians and the british press.

>> hello there, and welcome to the record review. big event at westminster over this session of parliament. coming up in this program, legislative plans and the queen's speech. and the trouble to reshape the house of lords. >> once it is gone, it is gone. 700 years of history will be undone if we support this bill. >> the opposition leader aung san suu kyi express's things at parliament. >> borgata has its unsatisfactory equivalent of questions that it will be able to say that parliamentary democracy has truly come of age. >> and bankers and securities brokers.

and then the queen came to parliament for the first time since the general election in may 2010. with the additional pomp and pageantry as the queen arrived in the australian state courage, making the short journey in about the course of an hour. ♪ after a quick change, and wearing her robes and crown common she gave a speech. >> my lords, please be seated. >> that there was the queen who dispatched to have been, and summoned to hear the speech.

>> mr. speaker, the queen commands this honorable house to attend, majesty immediately in the house of peers. >> the queen is then presented with a copy of the speech and finally reveals its secrets to the mps and the piers. it was a short speech, containing 15 bills, setting out plans for, among other things, pensions. >> economic growth. >> and with that, it was down to business. whatever planted had in its legislative program, every aspect continues to be nominated by just one thing, the state of britain's economy.

at the first "prime minister's questions," the labor leader talked to david cameron about whether or not the people should just work harder. >> this prime minister has failed to argue for, and britain made a proper growth plan, which he has failed to come up with. now business is pleading with the government for a growth plan. does he really agree with the foreign secretary that the problem with the economy is that british business is not working hard enough? >> there will be common ground between the british view and the french view. the french president went on to say how he would stimulate growth. he said the means cannot be extra public spending since we want to rein it in. the way out of the debt crisis

-- >> the leader returned to a decision in the chancellor's last budget to cut the top rated income tax to 45% from 50%. >> we cannot convince voters we are on their side meeting mr. and mrs. average reeling. they are unfair, out of touch, and they stand up for the wrong people. >> what this government has done is to attack scud for every single working person in this country and every household. we have taken 2 million people out of debt in our country, but what was the big decision, what is the big decision that the leader of your party has taken this week? he took the honorable member, the person who said they had to be serious about the deficit,

said they had to be serious about welfare reform, the person who told them that they had run out of money, and they replaced him. that is a big decision. i often wonder if his problem is that. >> the george osborne budget still causing issues several weeks after the chancellor had unveiled his plan. and some ideas were still proving controversial. the idea of introducing vat on big trades prompted an level of protest that could not have anticipated, with angry protesters even coming to westminster to make their point. and there was a reaction, too, to the george osborn plan to place a limit on tax relief for a charitable donations things

were announced during the may parliament to break. >> 24 million people, tax by 170 pounds. the amounts are tony compared to the total tax changes announced in the budget. >> the reality, mr. speaker, is the facts have not changed. they do not like to be held to account. they have tried to make a virtue of the policies that proved to be on popular by saying that they were listening. failure to do unnecessary work on a policy before announcing it and then sneaking out in hopes that no one was looking it is not consultation, mr. speaker.

it is total incompetence. is it the truth that this government was so desperate for money making measures that it was hoping to get away with it? >> she says that this government was desperate for money making measures. why does she think we need money making measures prove i have noticed that her party left the biggest deficit in peacetime that we have ever faced, and the extraordinary thing is that they always believe there is a magic money tree. i am afraid we do have to take steps to reduce the deficit. welcoming both the change, and we would also like to keep the top rate, and we did not win

that argument. they are turning up the volume. >> order. we must hear the boys. mr. simon hughes. >> to turn up the volume with the central message of the budget, which is that some pay no tax at all. >> there have been riot, and that has anchored motorists. even though prices had dipped a little, they were still a major issue. a handful of conservatives call for a common vote opposing any increases looming. the chancellor came to the house. >> rising global prices have increased the cost of living for families here in britain. this coalition government will do everything it can to help. we have already kept mortgage

bills low, and abolished a duty. i can say we will stop any rise in the fuel duty and freeze it for the rest of the year. that field duty will be 10 pence warren bennett by the last labour government, and this will fuel our economy. it will be fully paid for by the larger than forecast savings and department of budget, and we will set out details as usual in the august statement. >> mr. speaker, if i were not on crutches, i would be jumping for joy. it proves once more that this government is on behalf of the

hard-working families. >> the chancellor told a program a few weeks ago that the only thing worse than listening is not listening, and he certainly listen to this morning. we now have returns on churches, charities, and today, a u-turn on fuel. mr. speaker, it would be interesting to know at what point the decision was made, but now he is on a roll. would you also do a duty on the millionaire tax cuts? will he join us in the lobby? >> mr. speaker, it is quite difficult to do a u-turn on the labour policy.

i am not sure they have lined up. but the mps sitting directly behind him have just tweeted that it is the third rise and cannot improve the economy. if he thinks it will not improve the economy, what does the shadow chancellor do? >> mr. speaker, it is about the responsibility. what is the reality? a double dip recession? family budgets under pressure? his plan has failed, mr. speaker. is it not time that he listened to the side of the house approved is it not time we did another u-turn and adopt the

labour 5-point plan? >> there has been anger from some of the mp's. then there were celebrations to mark the queen's diamond jubilee. there was a river pageant. thousands of people lined the river thames to watch the boats and barges with the flotilla also to mark the queen's 60 years on the throne. other members of the royal family joined the celebration. there was a famous london landmark. it was broadcast over several hours of live television, which received some criticism to the bbc for inaccurate commentary. the outgoing director general accepted lessons to be learned but argued that those who watched it had enjoyed it. >> there are our mistakes every

single program we make. there was an appreciation index of 82, and we found that more after that with some -- which supports that. everyone is entitled to their opinion. but this is a program with the objective audience than it deserved and eight out of 10. of course, particularly any live program, we have lots to learn.

we had some bad luck with the weather. the weather had the specific effect of making communications between our cameras very difficult. we lost this for some time on the boats and on the dry land as well. on the river, covering the event. more than we would have liked. there were inaccuracies. i would say as with any program, i am sure that we can go away and learn some of the lessons.

this is just over 8.10. what i have to do is sit back and looked at by this. and when we look at many items live, all sorts of thing can happen. it was really good. and there were moments.

>> the public enjoying watching the pageant. some say this is pretty inappropriate on any channel. >> i do not really want to engage, 15 seconds out. >> there may be one or two. i have yet to come across -- >> as far as the jubilee, the parliamentary authority decided to rename this place. to the man on the street, it is big bend, probably the best

known landmarks. it is the clock tower, but now, it is to have a new name to mark her majesty's diamond jubilee. they will be >> what is the name of that tower behind you right there? >> big band. >> will you start calling in that? >> no. >> what if it was renamed the elizabeth tower. when you start calling it that? >> no. i have been calling it this my whole life. >> what is the name? did you know that it was recently renamed the elizabeth tower? will you start calling it the elizabeth terrapins >> i do not think so. i do not think anyone will understand.

>> it has been called this for a very long time. >> the tower is called something else. it is called the tower of something. the tower of parliament? >> if it is renamed the elizabeth to our, will you start calling it elizabeth to our print >> nokomis because i do not normally need to be calling it anything. >> more in the months to come. reform of the house of lords. the plan is for 360 elected people, each serving a 15-year term. they are joined by appointed members and bishops, down from the current 26. the leader of the lords came here to make a statement. >> this coincides with the general election. there will be a transitional

period with existing people leaving in thirds as each set of the elected members arrive. membership will no longer be linked to the peerage. there will be a continuing role for the bishops but in reduced number. a statutory appointments' commission will make nominations of 20% of the appointed members who would be expected to be non party political. the bill includes provisions are members of the house to be able to resign. it provides for resignation and gives the house the power to suspend all members. finally, my lords, the fundamental principles behind the bill have not changed. the government believes that those who make the laws of the land should be elected by those to whom the law applies. >> this does not all in not at the top of the priority list of the people of the country, it is

not even at the bottom of the priority list. in fact, it is not on the priority list at all because it is not a priority. less than one-fifth of the people of this country regard further house of lords reform as important. >> i particularly welcome, and i think other members of the joint committee will agree with me that the government has taken so much trouble with comprehensive analysis to make to rest the otherwise very speculative scaremongering estimates, and i think that is very, very helpful. looking at the system, looking at the way this operates, i am not sure the prime minister will put it on the list. thereby completely destroy the independence of this house, on which our constitution depends. >> the chairman has always

argued for divorce representation in this house and that it properly reflects the society as a whole. the government appears not to have accepted the committee recommendation but is now prepared to make explicit changes to the inclusion -- >> in july, there is a two-day debate by the deputy prime minister and nick clegg. there were looking at how long parliament should be debating these issues at a time of economic crisis. >> mr. speaker, no one doubts the commitment and public service of many members of the house of lords, but dedicated to the jewels cannot compensate for flawed institutions, and this bill is about fixing and

flawed institution, so let me begin by setting out why our upper chamber is in need of these reforms for three specific reasons, mr. speaker, why i hope members will give it attention. first, we all here believe in democracy. we believe that the people who make pilaus should be chosen by the people subject to those laws. that principle, mr. speaker, was established in britain after centuries of struggle, and it is a principle that we send our servicemen and women halfway around the world to defend, and yet, right now, we are one of only two countries in the world with the upper parliamentary chamber which is totally not elected and instead selects its members by birthright and patronage. an institution that serves the whole of the united kingdom yet draws more than half of its members from london and the

southeast, an institution in which there are eight times as many people over 90 as there are under 40, an institution which has no democratic mandate, none whatsoever, but which exercises real power. the house of lords initiates' bills. it sheds legislation. as governments of all persuasion know, it can block proposals, too. >> millions out of work. this would not be my priority if i sat on benches that the deputy prime minister sits on. however, we are where we are. so i am pleased, because, frankly, i am afraid his speech did not help matters either. >> and the debate continued the next day. >> once it is gone, it is gone.

600 years of history will be undone if we support this bill. i want to be able to look my children in the eye and say i did not forsake the british constitution. i did not. the house of lords is unique because a person is unique, and we should celebrate that fact and not try to change that. >> i am wondering if he drew attention, mr. speaker, when he stood at the last elections over the party manifesto that said they would work to pull the consensus and in brace the current house of lords, recognizing that an efficient second chamber should play an important role and requires both legitimacy and public confidence. mr. speaker, there was no commitment in the manifesto to

effectively abolish the house. >> they take a contrary view. every method within the standing orders of both houses to disrupt this, because this house alone lacks the legitimacy to pass it. it is not just a lesson in the british constitution sounds like a game of cribbage. it is more fundamental than that. it is at a time when politics needs to be more transparent and inclusive. the unelected structure makes politics opaque and exquisite. >> there was one of the ministerial aides to resign. >> i cannot support this bill on second reading. i could not look myself in the i if i voted for this bill on second reading, and it is incompatible with membership in her majesty's government, so i

informed the chief this morning that i have resigned as parliamentary secretary for northern ireland. i am doing that to vote for something i believe in strongly and on principle. i want to see a fully appointed second house, and i will go into a lobby tonight with the aim of trying to preserve that. >> labour said they would support the bill at second reading, but they were against the number of days set aside for debate. said theyrvative mp's would support that, so they were staring defeat in the eyes. then they said they would not put the timetable to a vote. >> mr. speaker, we have listened carefully to the debate so far, confident that we will get a significant majority at second reading tonight, but in order for this to progress, it needs

those who support reform to vote for reform and to vote for that reform to make progress through this house. it is clear that the opposition are not prepared to do that, so we will not, mr. speaker -- it is clear that the opposition are not prepared to do that, so we will not move this tonight. >> could i make clear that it is the conservative party who is responsible and not merely the labor party, -- labour party, and that should be reflected in the record. >> he knows it is over. there are more important -- important things. let's just call enough enough. >> to withdraw this today is, as

i said, a victory for parliament. mr. speaker, while we support the second reading of the bill, we could not support the efforts to curtail this, and we ask today live up to this and withdraw the motion today. >> yesterday, it was up four times. how long the opposition required to consider this particular bill, looking at how long her side would require the bill now? >> the government withdrew the vote on the timetable motion, and when it came to the vote on the principles of the bill at second reading, 91 conservative mp's rebel. and there was reports of some

angry exchanges with a back bench person. >> he lost control of the party, and not for the first time he lost his temper as well. because we understand, we understand it was in the lobby. he does not seem to be here. >> -- >> who does he blamed the most? the liberal democrats or his own backbenchers? >> romera. >> if we want to see house of lords reform, all of those who support house of lords reform need to not only vote for house of lords reform but support the means to bring that reform about. he came to the house of commons yesterday determined to vote yes

and then vote know. how utterly pathetic. >> mr. speaker, it is the same old story with the prime minister. he blames everybody other than himself. the government is a shambles, and he blames the leader of the opposition. that is what it has come to. >> the bill passed its second reading, but reform is one of the issues of british politics. economic policies. a coalition in chaos. it is a question i put to a professor from the london school of economics. >> no, the country is not in chaos, but it is behaving in a way very different than a way that we have seen governments behaving. it is divided. members speak out against each other. collective responsibility does not work and the way that it

does when you have a single party in power. >> the leadership, very much in it -- very much in favor of it. >> the threats to the coalition do not come from the government, the coalition government. there is not one coalition, there are two coalitions. the conservative party. in the warm glow of forming a government in 2010, the united behind its leader. it is becoming increasingly divided, and it seems fragmentations within that coalition, not just over house of lords reform but over energy policy, over attitudes towards the eu, which in the long run will be threatening to the other coalition. >> this is westminster hall, oldest and missed -- most historic part of westminster. it was here in 1606 that there

was the gun powder episode where someone was tried for treason and later beheaded. in recent years, politicians and heads of state around the world, and in june, aung san suu kyi came here to address the mp's and peers. there were the years of military rule in burma. she became a symbol of peaceful resistance in the face of oppression. she was introduced by the speaker. >> one woman has now defied a dictatorship of such depravity for two decades. that is why aung san suu kyi, a leader and a stateswoman, is with us here in westminster this afternoon. >> she said burma now had a chance to reestablish democracy. >> thus far, i have only spent a

matter of minutes inside the burmese parliament, and i took the oath last month. i must say that i found it rather formal. men are required to wear a formal head gear. there is certainly no heckling. i would wish in times we would reflect the liveliness and informality of westminster. [laughter] i am well aware that more tears have been shared over wishes granted to ban which is denied. it is our own satisfactory equivalent of "prime minister's questions" that we will be able to see the parliamentary democracy has truly come of age. i would like to emphasize in conclusion that this is the most important time for burma, that this is the moment of our greatest need, and so we ask

that our friends both here in britain and beyond, participate and support the burmese efforts towards establishment of a truly democratic and just society. thank you for giving me this opportunity to address the members of one of the oldest democratic institutions in the world. thank you for letting me into your mets. my country has not yet entered the ranks of truly democratic societies, but i am confident that we will get there before too long, with your help. thank you. [applause] >> now, for a brief walk of some of the issues from westminster which have been hitting the headlines. causing trouble for the tories in recent years, in july, david cameron wrote an article suggesting britain could have a

referendum on its membership in the european union. the subject came up in the comments following yet another eu summit to try to tackle the euro zone crisis. some backbenchers are campaign for a public vote. they later accused the prime minister of trying to appease skeptics. >> i do not believe the status quo is acceptable. but just as i believe it would be wrong to have an immediate referendum, so it would also be wrong to rule out any type of referendum for the future and not some sort of nod-nod policy. five years ago, he said his party should stop banging on about europe, but now he is the one getting out of the drum. >> in britain, for the need of reforms in our relationship with the european union, would the prime minister agree that the worst possible moment to start negotiating with 26 other

countries is when all of the member states are quite rightly preoccupied with the very future of the euro zone and the potential of its collapse? >> the agreement is clear. there is a provision for a referendum. it is apart from the u.k. to brussels. there is no provision for any of the referendum, and we agree that the priority, as evidenced last weekend, is that the 27 european countries were together to deal with the most urgent economic crisis across europe. >> they have condemned recent aggression towards the falklands islands and the liberation of port stanley. they said they will also offer a referendum next year about the political status of the falklands in and it attempted to try to resolve the issue. the islanders want to remain british. the minister urged argentina to

accept the vote. >> for our part, the british government will continue to offer in a critical support to the islanders by maintaining a defense of military pressure on the islands, by supporting their growing economy, and by protecting their rights and their wishes today, just as we did 30 years ago. the forthcoming referendum will provide, i believe, further evidence that the islanders alone will decide their future and will offer eight simple but powerful expression of democracy. i hope that argentina and indeed all in the international community will take note of the expressedfreely democratic views. >> talking about the weather, this year, there has certainly been lots to talk about. parts of england received two months' worth of rainfall in 36 hours, while others did so in

just 24 hours. there were stranded homeowners who were rescued, while a host of summer events were disrupted or cancel of -- or cancelled. >> nothing could have stopped what happened with the water on friday night. my wife and i saw firsthand from the valley bottom of of those committees, one month's worth of water coming down in torrents down those country lanes. >> i do know what it feels like, having had to evacuate my own home, 10 months after flooding. it takes a long time and a long tall, even on people's mental health, to get back to the state before the flood. >> and there was a u-2 sensation after a rather passionate contribution to prime minister's questions, asking about education. >> this government has a great

record on educational reform. this excess of the university. air around of obligations, universities. -- and their round of obligations to universities. >> the leveson inquiry started with investigations at the now- defunct "news of the world," part of the rupert murdoch news corner operations. there was the attempted purchase of bskyb.

they wanted to look into the advisory coded to see if he had broken any rules. nick clegg told them to abstain, and the secretary hit back. >> as concern for the rights of this house, it will represent many and fool none. some will say that she is no better than the newspapers that she has so criticized. mr. speaker, i have spent six weeks being accountable for my reactions, and she has spent six weeks cooking up allegations, and they have proved wrong. she should be accountable, too, the right honorable lady. >> he explained why his policy would not support calls for an

investigation. >> the house is well aware that this is not a decision for the house. it is a decision for the prime minister. he has made that decision. this is, therefore, a political ruse by the labour party, whose behavior on these issues quite frankly has been appalling. >> there was the ministerial code, 290 votes to to madrid 66. the government majority. not for the first time, some of the explosive moments came here, in the commons select committee warm, and they certainly have the latest banking scandal. at the end of june, barclays was fined nearly 300 million pounds for fixing a key interbank lending rate, known as libor.

when the recently resigned had appeared before the committee, they wanted to know how it could have happened. >> there were 173 calls, either up or down, plus others, seven requests from other banks. fixing rates on their behalf. a small group of traders, there was clearly a significant amount going on. >> they were looking to impact the libor. it is wrong. >> so do you agree that rather than a tiny issue with collusion among a few, it was more, and what do you have to say about those individuals and the fact that they allowed to be

incentivized to the extent that the traders were actually able to persuade them? what does that say? >> it was appalling. as soon as we knew it, it was eradicated, and many of the traders, when we discovered this, some had already left, and somewhere in used immediately. -- some were removed immediately. i cannot go back and change it. i dealt with it. i understand there will be criminal investigations on certain individuals. it is not up to us, but we are certainly not want to let them get away with it. >> you are the man in charge, and when you are in charge, you are the one being paid these huge, phenomenal bonuses.

you are accepting all the good side, the bonuses, and the people working for you have been in the system, potentially some of them going to prison, criminality, you are the man in charge. in such a situation, your shares. that is a pretty small pace -- price for you to pay. some contrition for those customers you are wondering and emailing me about what happened to their money. i am asking you, what are you going to do to set the record straight with your personal behavior because you personally are responsible either by complicit or by incompetence. >> i accept responsibility, and

i also accept responsibility for the actions to correct the situation, also the way in which we engaged with the regulators. i know that there was not a personal culpability among the traders. this was happening on my watch. >> and there was the governor of the bank of england. his meetinged about before bob diamond resigned. >> this was about handing someone over. the chief executive. >> i do not like these firearms allegations, and they are false. i finished a meeting by saying i would like you to make clear to the board that the regulators of express these concerns, and the board needs to know that

they are very concerned and have lost confidence in the executive management. i did not know what the outcome of that meeting would be. >> he was asked about the interbank lending rate, libor. >> the new york fed sent you a paper designed to stamp and out. >> no, they did not design it. it has to representative procedures to deal with the reporting. that does not add up to accusations. at that moment, any individual that has been suspected. after all, it did take the regulators three years of going through millions if not billions of papers and emails in order to discover this that were and reports two weeks ago. >> a committee was told that there was not a town, hamlet, or village in which children were not being sexually exploited. they are carrying out an

investigation, following a case of sexual abuse involving a group of man -- a group of men of mainly pakistan origin. >> i have worked for many, many years. i have sent many with child sexual abuse. i have yet to encounter and the community in which there are some people that are keen of actually carrying out to abuse children. there are always horrible people with an ever committee that will take opportunity, but they are the minority. >> in other parts of the world. visiting russia and ukraine. we have no illusions. this sickness that occurred, how far would you say this is happening in other cities and towns in the country? >> what i am uncovering is the

sexual exploitation of children is happening all over the country. there is one police officer that was a lead in a very big investigation who said to me there is not a town, village, or hamlet in which children are not having this happen. that is what he said. >> a police officer in a particular part of the country that was responsible for the investigation. he was aware of a lot of other investigations that were bubbling up as well. the evidence that has come to the four -- fore is that that is the case. we should start with the assumption that children are being sexually exploited right across the country. urban or metropolitan areas. i have hard evidence of children

being sexually exploited. it is very sadistic. it is very violent. it is very, very ugly. >> you are describing this to the appalling abuses, if they are admitting the abuses, they are subject to extreme measures of control. we have heard the are trying to improve the and identification of victims, but you have actually been speaking to these victims. can you tell us, do you think that these victims feel like they can disclose to authorities at this point? or is there a problem with that? >> the picture is inevitably variable.

there is still too much of a culture of blaming children, seeing them as promiscuous. the language that i spelled out about children being prostitutes instead of recognizing that these are children who have been sexually exploited. the effects of that is that the professionals are less likely to take the children seriously. i was talking to this young woman yesterday, but she is by no means an exception, and she was telling me how she tried to tell, and people had not listened. they had not believed her. of course, her story was not always consistent. she said sometimes she was drugged. sometimes she was very drunk and was not exactly sure what was going on. she recognized that restores were not consistent, and as a result, she was not always believed. i think we have to recognize that what is happening is a

terrible that people need to lay aside the denial really, because it is a natural human response. to actually face up to the fact that terrible things are being done. >> she has spent -- london has spent years preparing for the arrival of the olympic games. there was the immigration system and be prepared this or lack of it of those in charge of much of the security of the games that caused the biggest ruckus. the company announced it was not able to fulfill its contract for security in east london and other olympic venues with only a fortnight to go. thousands of military personnel had to be brought in to meet the shortfall, and police or also brought in to meet the gap.

he said he was deeply sorry for what he admitted was an embarrassing shambles. >> there is a question from the chair about the reputation. many would take the view that the reputation of the company is now in tatters. you would not agree? >> i think at the moment, i would have to agree with you. we have had a fantastic record in many countries, but clearly this is not a good position to be in. we make every endeavor to it -- to deliver as well as we could on this contract. >> it is in shambles. >> it is not where we want it to be. >> it is a humiliating shambles for the country, yes or no. >> i cannot disagree with you. >> can you see that people are sick of huge corporations like

yours that think they can get away with it? they can charge hundreds of millions of pounds to the taxpayers to deliver a service that as a crucial reputation and importance to its country as well as to your company and then fail and fail to him until days before hand. it is inexcusable, is it not? >> there were time issues involved, but in terms of the contract, the reason we did it is that financially is not a huge issue for us. >> i thought you just said it was. >> compared to what it was going to cost us now, it clearly is. >> is that not the root of the problem? it was not important to your company financially. only now has it become important and given the priority it deserves. >> we certainly check as a priority, and we took this

opportunity because we felt we were the only company able to do it. >> so are the select committees now the best place to hold politicians, senior servants, and top company brass to account? what next for the coalition put questions i put to a professor. but first, are they really where the parliamentary muscle is? >> the kennedys and the independent back benchers, like one, for instance, he said that the trouble with the government is that it is run by pasha boy is, what we expected in the past and the government and supporters. but the committees are aware that discussion occurs in a way that we have not been used to in the past, most spectacularly, of course, with the grilling of the

rupert murdoch family and the empire. coalition politics has created more open disagreement, more dissent, more criticism, and to that extent, parliamentary committees have taken up on that, not just on energy policy, and we can expectancy that continuing and growing. this has become even tougher with practice in the future. >> on the other side of the coalition, the liberal democrats seem to be less, in public at least. >> yes. that is true. within the liberal party, outside of parliament, there have been severe reservations about some coalition policy, to agree on things like the national health service. it has been tt